> Are you just stating that it sucks as a type name because it's not clear?
Yes.
I guess, more than being unclear ("foo_t" would be unclear), it's
downright misleading.
On Fri, Aug 3, 2012 at 11:51 AM, Ted Mielczarek <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 3, 2012 at 11:35 AM, Justin Lebar <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Do we have a preference between using explicitly-sized arguments (e.g.
>> PRInt32) and implicitly-sized arguments (e.g. long) in XPIDL?
>
> Is it really implicitly-sized? It's actually defined as PRInt32 by
> XPIDL. I agree that it sucks as a type name, but a lot of things suck
> about XPIDL. Are you just stating that it sucks as a type name because
> it's not clear?
>
> -Ted
_______________________________________________
dev-platform mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
